Are the Polish cheeky?

From Jim Miller's website ( http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/ ):

The Poles don't seem to agree with Ritter. Not only did they provide troops in the war to liberate Iraq, but they will be controlling part of Iraq during the reconstruction. And, perhaps just to be cheeky, they have asked for German troops under their command. The Germans, with more experience giving orders to Poles than taking them, don't know how to react. Sounds like a fine idea. The German government may learn something from the experience.


Poles want to lead German peace units
By Robin Gedye, Foreign Affairs Writer
(Filed: 07/05/2003)

Germany was yesterday scrambling to formulate a response to an unexpected and unwelcome invitation to send peacekeepers to Iraq under Polish command.

Peter Struck, the Germany defence minister, said the offer to work in the Polish sector of Iraq was "totally unexpected". He added that he was astonished by the request.

Iraq is being split into American, British and Polish sectors, to be patrolled by so-called stabilisation forces, with a possible fourth sector still to be assigned.

Mr Struck, clearly wrong-footed by the offer, said he had learned of the invitation from Jerzy Szmajdzinski, the Polish defence minister, only when he read about it in the American media.

Mr Szmajdzinski, in Washington for talks on setting up an Iraq stabilisation force, suggested that the Polish sector could be based on a joint Polish-Danish-German Nato corps stationed in Gdansk.

"He had not said a single word to me about it before," said Mr Struck, who was also visiting Washington, but on a different mission. Germany is desperate to rebuild diplomatic bridges destroyed by its anti-war rhetoric.

Germany, which opposed war "under any circumstances", has always insisted that the post-war administration must be placed under United Nations auspices.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/05/07/wirq307.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/05/07/ixnewstop.html

 

Bah, the Poles were a nation and military powerhouse long before the squabbling German mini-states coalesced into what we know today. It's good they are starting to take a place on the world scene again, following the Nazi occupation and descent into communism they have suffered for so long now. Go Poles!

 

Found this on British Mod site:

Poland Puts Iraq Carve-up in Doubt
Wednesday, May 07, 2003


Plans to deploy a multinational stabilisation force in Iraq were thrown in doubt yesterday when Poland, one of the expected key troop contributors, insisted that the force required a UN mandate.

The demand throws a shadow over a meeting in London tomorrow aimed at securing pledges of troop deployments for the British zone of control.

The Polish foreign minister, Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz, presented his position after talks in Washington with the US secretary of state, Colin Powell. "We believe that we need that kind of resolution. I understand that in days ahead there will be some initiatives opening the way to have such a resolution," he said.

The US is preparing to present a comprehensive UN resolution to the UN security council covering the division of responsibilities and powers in postwar Iraq, but it is likely to meet stiff resistance from France, Russia and China.

A drawn-out debate over the resolution could delay the deployment of at least some of the stabilisation force.

Poland was expected to be a key contributor, sending about 1,500 troops and commanding one of up to four zones of control. Some diplomatic sources suggested they would be sent to the port of Umm Qasr.

British forces would be based in Basra, commanding a multinational brigade including Spanish troops, and a mix of forces from other European and Latin American states. Tomorrow's meeting will focus on shaping that brigade.

American troops would control Baghdad, and Poland would be responsible for central Iraq. Mr Cimoszewicz has proposed a meeting on May 22 in Warsaw to finalise pledges of troop commitments. A fourth zone could be carved out in the north or west, but it is unclear which country would run it.

As negotiations over the stabilisation force continued in Washington yesterday, President George Bush appointed a new civilian administrator for Iraq. Paul Bremer, a diplomat specialising in counter-terrorism, will be in charge of the Pentagon's envoy for reconstruction and humanitarian assistance, Jay Garner, a former general.

The Spanish defence minister, Federico Trillo, said 1,500 of his country's troops would operate in the British area that he defined as "zone 4 south".

Mr Cimoszewicz said it was intended "to have all the countries ready to engage" in Iraq by the end of this month.

After meeting Mr Powell, he urged Germany and other European states to contribute to Iraq's stabilisation and reconstruction. "Success or failure will have broad international consequences," he said.

Spanish newspapers quoted defence ministry officials yesterday saying that Honduras and Nicaragua had offered troops for the "Spanish brigade" only if Spain paid for them. Chile and Argentina had said they would take part in a UN force only, the reports said.

The odd assortment of nations being consulted reflects the difficulties Washington has faced trying to gain support for its occupation of postwar Iraq. Few countries with experience in the Middle East are on board, and no Islamic countries have offered troops.

Most of the willing are relatively impoverished states eager to enhance their relationship with the US but unable to pay their way.

The Polish defence minister, Jerzy Szmajdzinski, said he had received an assurance from his American counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, that the US would help raise money from international donors to cover the cost of about 1,500 Polish troops and a headquarters staff. Mr Szmajdzinski estimated the cost at $50m for six months.

Poland's deputy defence minister, Janusz Zemke, said that the Polish troops could be initially stationed in Iraq for a year and then rotated every six months.

He said they would play an important role protecting energy facilities, telecommunication hubs and transport arteries. Troops from a chemical defence regiment have already been mobilised and are expected to leave for Iraq soon.

Mr Zemke said that up to 11 European countries had expressed an interest in taking part. "We are also getting signs that certain Asian countries, for example India, Pakistan and the Philippines, would be prepared to send troops," Mr Zemke said.

Most of the potential contributors are anxious to ensure their soldiers avoid conflict. Spain has stated that it does not want to have to intervene in demonstrations. "We want somewhere that is as calm as possible," said a government official quoted by El Mundo newspaper yesterday.

A senior US official said the US sector would be patrolled by 20,000 troops remaining separate from the 135,000 combat troops already in Iraq.

Bulgaria's defence minister, Nikolai Svinarov, said his country would send 450 soldiers to Iraq.

However, Bulgaria, like Poland, wants the US to help find funds to finance its contribution.

 

Mmmmhhhrrr... Those 'seperiority' beliefs and vengeance can't bring good things, remember?

1871: Kaiser Wilhelm II crowning at Versailles.

1914: Peace Treaty made at Versailles.

1940: Armistice signed in général Foch's railroad car, where the 1918 Armistice was signed...

 

Hey, a Germo-Poland-bashing thread! Fine!

I wonder what the Poles would do in their Iraq sector? Selling cigarettes or re-painting "found" cars?

Seriously,it makes sense that they get an own sector: They participated with 200 men in the war and have the best connections to Iraq back from the 80-ies. Poland was the top trade and military-advise partner of Saddam back in this time, IIRC.

A lot of Iraq officials and officers understand Polish because they studied / trained there.

And of course, Poland was, is, will be "sandwiched" between germany and Russia. As soon as Russia "arrives" in Western Europe, noone needs that cordon sanitaire countries any more.

Cheers from AndyW, (feeling particular imperialistic today )

 

Is this good or bad?

 

This means, in those days when I fell particulary American (= all those tiny little "know-it-all-better-countries" around you playing their nag-nag-nag-game), I sit back and recapture how long it took Germany to conquer:

Austria: 1 day, not a single shot
Czech Republic. 1 day, not a single shot
Poland: 2 weeks, some something you can do during vacation
Denmark: 1 day, a soldier died by stroke
The Netherlands: 4 days
Belgium: 18 days
Luxembourg: the time you need for a good dinner with your girlfriend
France: 43 days
Switzerland: always been afraind to attack it.

Call me an old fascist fart, I feel much more relaxed knowing that our neighbors surely want a peaceful germany as much as I want it

Cheers,

[ 14. May 2003, 05:00 PM: Message edited by: AndyW ]

 

Andy you missed out initial invasion of Yugoslavia....

 

I Object! Holland capitulated on the 15th. We were invaded on the 10th. That makes five days!

I demand rectification!

 

urqh: I was only refering to neighbor countries.

Stevin: 5 days would make sense if May 10 was a Monday, making The Netherlands an usual working week for the Wehrmacht.

Cheers,

 

Bad case of Pole-envy if you ask me. Of course, the Poles actually managed to beat off the Red Army in front of Warsaw, something the Wehrmacht failed patently to do at both Warsaw and Berlin (and Budapest and Vienna and Prague and...). Come to think of it both the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe received a serious spanking from Polish ground and air units for the remainder of the war, barring those first couple of weeks.

 

Oops, better not look at the rest then...when its putlike that, its truly amazing no matter what the politics or the rights and the wrongs of the matter, just look at the maps change colour in those early years...

And the resistance offered...

 

The best is yet to come...

1000-Year Reich in 12 years



[ 15. May 2003, 03:04 AM: Message edited by: Kai-Petri ]

 

Why are we complaining about Polish? Polish are nice people. Very clean, but nice. Anyway, I think this is a very sutle joke on the part of the Polish. Anyway, I would like to see German troops taking orders from Poles.

 

Welcome , WW2buff!

How can you be over 700..member by the way...?

Anyway, it´s nice to see some people thinking the Polish way as well as some threads would require it...like Warsaw 1944...

 

Hi Kai, I think that it's because that Otto deleted people who signed up but never made any postings several months ago--but the actual member numbers haven't been corrected yet. I think this was in order to I guess update that part of the site too?

Not sure but--I have to ask him about it sometime.

 

Stevin is right! Holland surrendered in 5 days, not 4. And Poland required a whole month, not two weeks.

And of course Jugoslavia counts, because it took 60 German casualties and 5 days to beat a big country with a million men-Army.

Not quite right, Heartland. You CANNOT compare the Red Army of 1939, bad-leaded and poorly-equiped with the Red Army of 1945. And of course the Wehrmacht in 1939 was far more professional and better than that of 1945...

And the Poles did counterattacked severely and resisted fiercely. They were very brave enemies.

 

Thank you, Friedrich! 4 days would be a walk over...

There's a little "inside" joke that goes; The Germans came racing to the Dutch border in their tanks, when they crossed the border, they shift their gears in neutral and by the time they came to a standstill they were at the coast....

 

I am not trying to do anyone's job for them but, how is this related to Polish forces commading German troops in a peacekeeping mission? Just wondering.

 

Well, Stevin. I was just saying. My grandfather was at the surrender ceremony with Von Bock and Von Küchler.